| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| JUI activists acquitted in ransacking case |
| 2013-11-24 |
| [Dawn] An anti-terrorism court here on Friday acquitted 11 activists of Jamaat Ulema-e-Islam ...Assembly of Islamic Clergy, or JUI, is a Pak Deobandi (Hanafi) political party. There are two main branches, one led by Maulana Fazlur Rahman, and one led by Maulana Samiul Haq. Fazl is active in Pak politix and Sami spends more time running his madrassah. Both branches sponsor branches of the Taliban, though with plausible deniability... -F including one of its candidates in general elections in a case of storming and ransacking courts in Charsadda district during an electoral dispute over recounting of votes. The court presided over by Anwer Hussain Khan pronounced that the prosecution could not prove its case against the 11 suspects including Mufti Gohar Shah, who was a candidate for the provincial assembly seat PK-20, Charsadda, in the May 11, 2013, general elections. Mufti Gohar Shah was prime accused in the case and had remained absconder for several months. Earlier, 17 other activists of the party were acquitted in the same case. Mufti Gohar Shah had lost to a candidate of Qaumi Watan Party, Khalid Khan, on the said seat with a margin of 1,169 votes and he had alleged rigging in the polls. He had submitted an application to the returning officer concerned for recounting of votes and on the day of recounting he and his supporters staged a demonstration and later on allegedly stormed the tehsil courts at Tanghi. The accused persons had allegedly ransacked courtrooms and pelted stones on the building. An FIR was registered against them at Tanghi cop shoppe under section 7 of the Anti Terrorism Act and several sections of Pakistain Penal Code. The counsel appearing for the accused persons contended that they were falsely implicated in the case. He contended that there was no evidence on record to prove that Mufti Gohar had instigated the persons who had attacked the building. He added that the offence was carried out by a mob in which it could not be identified as to who had participated in the illegal act. |
| Posted by:Fred |